Clearing M F Husain, HC slams ‘new Indian puritanism of the ignorant crowd’

of any artist today who have tried to play around with nudity have come under scrutiny. These artists have had to face the music, making them think twice before exhibiting their work of art.”

Seeking to distance the world of creative sensibilities from that of self-declared “puritanists,” the judge, in It found “baseless” criminal proceedings against the 91-year-old artist for

“We have been called the land of Kamasutra,” the judge said, “then why is it that in the land of Kamasutra, we shy away from its very name? Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder and so does obscenity.”

The court referred Hussain’s case as a typical example of an artist facing the ire of “the types who would not go to art galleries or have interest in contemporary art…because if they did, they would know that there are many artists who embrace nudity as part of contemporary art.”

The strongly-worded judgment empathised with the artist fraternity, who are left to run from “pillar to post in an Information Age where our law does not adequately protect creative people.”

“India’s new Puritanism, practised by a largely ignorant crowd in the name of Indian spiritual purity, is threatening to throw the nation back into the Pre-Renaissance era,” observed Justice Kaul. “Criminal justice system should not be used as an easy recourse to ventilate against a creative act.”

“Today, each painting has a story to narrate. Art to every artist is a vehicle for personal expression. An aesthetic work of art has the vigour to connect to an individual sensually, emotionally, mentally and spiritually,” observed the court.

It was clear from published records and interviews, excerpts of which were produced before the court, of the painter that he had “no deliberate intention to manifestly insult ‘Bharat Mata,’” the judge said, adding: “In fact, he had consistently maintained that he actually celebrates nudity and considered it as the purest form of expression.”

“The test for judging a work of art should be that of an ordinary man of common sense and not that of a hyper-sensitive one,” distinguished the court. “Therefore looking at a piece of art from the painter’s perspective becomes very important, especially in the context of the nude.”

Art and artists were once patronised by kings and elite classes, the court explained from history. “Art and authority never had a difficult relationship, until recently…Our greatest problem today is fundamentalism, the triumph of the letter over the spirit.”

In an expression of approval to the quashing of the arrest warrants against the painter, Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium assured the court that he would write to the Law Commission suggesting measures to protect artists.

Shamshad Hussain, son of M F Hussain and also a painter, said he was “happy” with the verdict, but voiced apprehensions about the other cases pending against his father. Eight criminal cases had been filed against Hussain in places, including Delhi, Indore, Rajkot and Hardwar. All these were transferred to the Patiala trial courts here on the Supreme Court’s directions in September 2007. Hussain’s counsel, Akhil Sibal, called the judgment “historic and wonderful”.

Reacting to the verdict, advocate Poornima Sethi, who represented complainant A S Naruka, said: “Can the fundamental right of speech and expression of one person override the fundamental right of speech and expression of an entire community?…Why has this painter attacked the idols of one particular majority community? If his concern is art, then he should also concern himself with the figures of other communities too?”. She added that her clients would “definitely take proper legal steps” against the High Court verdict.